Bench Rest vrs. 'Regular' Primer's

[McLernon]

Another question regarding primers:

Do BR primers need to be hit harder or more consistently than 'Regular' primers in order to perform properly? It is my understanding that BR primers are built for "high class' guns that naturally strike the primer harder and more consistently.

And "Regular' primers are less demanding regarding how hard and how consistently they are struck and so are more suitable for 'production' guns. Is there any truth to this?? The implication is that we ought not use BR primers in 'production' guns. Any comments

McL

[ricciardelli]

The only difference I have noticed is in the cost.

[beemanbeme]

I have used copious amounts of both BR and standard primers in my "box" guns.  They have both consistantly gone bang when I pulled the little hangy down thingy underneath the rifle.
I, like Steve, think that BR primers are excellent proof that P.T. Barnum's theory is correct.   :grin:

[roper]

You see everything from cup thickness to coatings as to the difference between the two.  How a firing pin strikes a primer is more imortant than what  type of primer you are using .  When you hear all the stuff about striking the primer harder in the high end rifles that isn't really it see if I can explain it right.  the BR guys bushing the firing pin hole to get a uniform opening so that the firing pin hits the primer the same everytime they also change the firing pin spring often.     If you can ever get to see the firing pin deal out of a j-lock rifle it really tell the story better you will see a big bend in the spring that allow the firing pin to sort of drag on one side.  You are on the right track as to how consistly the primer is hit and the high end rifles just pay more attention to that then a factory rifle.  When chorongraphing a load the ES can effect the MOA on a 1000yd rifle it's just one of the variables you want to elimate.  You can go over the benchrest .com alot of those guys are really into primers more and can go into the coating more like on Fed BR primers over the standard ones.  Well good luck.

[McLernon]

Thanks for the input

McL

[skb2706]

Don't know if there is any real difference. I got started using them because they were the only thing they had at the store...way back when. Just kinda stuck with me.....I use CCI BR-4 religiously and its only out of habit. Price difference around here is $1 per thousand...I can live with that.....with or without PT Barnums input.

[jimann]

Thought I would add my two cents... Years ago (I'm sure someone on the forum, knows when) Handloader or Rifle magazine had an article on this very thing, with photos showing that Bench rest primers were more consistent... Also years ago I was having trouble getting Federal match primers(they had a fire). I asked a fellow shooter, who tested bullets for Sierra, what to do and he told me to go back to them as soon as they were available again. I did and still do. I have never tested to see if there are any differences but I trust them. And that is a good thing.
jim

[ajj]

Just repeating what I've read various places over the years, most match primers (Federal and Remington) are simply collected from the same "machine" thereby insuring more uniformity, at least theoretically. CCI's BR primers, however, are a dedicated, separate type with a pellet which yields medium-to-moderate brisance (shattering force) but a slightly longer-than-average burn duration. And the little "B" stamped in the cup make them worth the extra cost just for that feature. If this is all true then you should be able to test regular Fed and Rem primers to develop a good load and then spring for the match version if you think having them all from one machine makes a difference, while keeping CCI BR in a separate catagory as worth a try even if the gun doesn't like regular CCI.

[zrifleman]

I can crush Federal Gold Medal primers with my RCBS hand primer. I have several reasons for believing the cups are softer, hence more sensitive. When I have missfires/primers not dented deeeply enough with Winchester or CCI and switch to Federal, the problem goes away.

[beemanbeme]

Guys, not to jack this thread, but as a sidebar, I would imagine that over the years, I have fired 100's of thousands of primers.  And on the few, very, very few, in fact, failures that I can call to mind,  I can't recall one where the fault could not be traced to a mechanical lack in the piece.  

Even with that, I can only recall a few failures over a course of almost 60 years.  

In my opinion, if you are having failures to fire with one brand of primers and when you switch to another brand, the problems goes away, you haven't corrected the problem, merely masked it.

[McLernon]

Hello Beemanbeme

What do you think is the answer to my question under the posting 'Primer Performance'??? I would very much like your input.

Thanks

McL

[Catfish]

Bench rest primers give you a more consistant ignition every time. Now if you do not have a gun that will shoot 1 moa you will probibly not be able to tell a difference in accuracy. I use only BR primer in my guns that shoot sub-MOA, except for my .17 AH because they are to hot for the small case. As for Fed. primers, they are definately the softest on the market. I load for some guys that shoot race gun and with the liter springs in them the Fed. primers are the only ones that will fire in them.
   If your shooting a hunting rifle that that is not shooting 1 moa or better to start with don`t waist you money on BR primers. If you have a target rifle shooting 1/2 moa they are a must.